“Justice System Practices That Work”
Download
1 / 41

justice system practices that work travis county community corrections and supervision department cscd conference - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 222 Views
  • Uploaded on

“Justice System Practices That Work” Travis County Community Corrections and Supervision Department (CSCD) Conference. June 29, 2006 Stephen F. Austin Hotel Austin, Texas. Welcome and Introduction. Dr. Geraldine Nagy Director of Travis CSCD since January 2005

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' justice system practices that work travis county community corrections and supervision department cscd conference' - Patman


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Slide1 l.jpg

“Justice System Practices That Work”Travis County Community Corrections and Supervision Department (CSCD) Conference

June 29, 2006

Stephen F. Austin Hotel

Austin, Texas


Welcome and introduction l.jpg
Welcome and Introduction

  • Dr. Geraldine Nagy

    • Director of Travis CSCD since January 2005

    • Former Deputy Director for the Community Justice Assistance Division (CJAD) of the TDCJ

    • Prior with the Federal Bureau of Prisons; Deputy Director of Bastrop County CSCD

    • Ph.D. in Psychology, Kansas State University


Purpose of conference l.jpg
Purpose of Conference

  • Bring together Travis justice community to:

    • Learn about the “Travis Community Impact Supervision” initiative of the department

    • Hear from national experts about evidence of what works and the challenges of implementing successful policies

    • Explore how to be more innovative and get feedback from participants


Challenges facing probation l.jpg
Challenges Facing Probation

Demands for probation systems to become more effective in reducing recidivism and divert offenders from prison while protecting public safety

Evidence Based Practices (EBP) model as a strategy to enhance the effectiveness of probation

EBP are practices in which there is general evidence of effectiveness in reducing recidivism

Organizational practices

Testing in Travis County Probation Department

Austin, Texas

Diagnosis and supervision strategies

Program intervention and accountability


Department assessment promising for ebp l.jpg
Department Assessment Promising for EBP

Travis department has qualified personnel, strong processes, supportive judiciary and active Community Justice Council to provide foundation for EBP

Department needs to improve assessment and field supervision strategies, program monitoring, and training, and needs to bring balance to a culture in which process is main focus

Travis Community Impact Supervision Model (TCIS)


Step one improve assessments of offenders l.jpg

Low Risk Offender

Social Problem Offender

High Risk – “Last Chance” Offender

Minimum Supervision

Report on time, pay fines and fees

Programs and Progressive Sanctions

Change behavior

Surveillance Approach

Quick sanctioning and revocation

Differentiated Supervision Strategies

Step One: Improve Assessments of Offenders

Effective Assessments to Classify Population





Overview of the day l.jpg
Overview of the Day

  • Dr. Tony Fabelo

    • Former Director of the Texas Criminal Justice Policy Council

    • Served under five governors and ten regular biennial legislative sessions

    • Now Senior Associate in Austin of The JFA Institute, Washington

    • Ph.D. from The University of Texas at Austin in Government


Improving the effectiveness of probation l.jpg
Improving the Effectiveness of Probation

  • 9:30 am to 10:45 am

  • Dr. Edward Latessa

    • Director, Division of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati

    • Ph.D. from Ohio State University

    • Among many studies, two recent studies for Ohio involving over 26,000 probationers and the review of over 100 programs


Justice mapping thinking about location l.jpg
Justice Mapping: Thinking About Location

  • 11:00 am to 11:45 am

  • Eric Cadora

    • Directs The JFA Mapping Center working with the Spatial Information Design Lab, Columbia University

    • Expert in spatial visualization studies

    • Works in many states and United Kingdom helping visualize Justice Reinvestment Strategies


Better diagnosis practices as key to success l.jpg
Better Diagnosis Practices as Key to Success

  • 11:45 am to 1:15 pm Lunch

  • 1:15 pm to 2:30 pm

  • Dr. Nagy and Dr. Fabelo

    • Review development of new diagnosis practices for probationers in Travis

  • 2:30 pm to 2:45 pm Break


Proficient justice l.jpg
Proficient Justice

  • 2:45 pm to 4:00 pm

  • Mark Carey

    • President, The Carey Group, consulting and training for justice system

    • Prior Deputy Commissioner, Community and Juvenile Services, Minnesota DOC

    • President this year of American Probation and Parole Association


Bottom line l.jpg
Bottom Line

  • Dr. Latessa

    • Successful probation programs depend on effective assessment of offenders

    • Treatment programs work but they have to be effectively implemented

  • Cadora

    • Geographical concentration of justice populations should be considered in creating more effective probation supervision strategies


Bottom line continued l.jpg
Bottom Line (continued)

  • Dr. Nagy and Dr. Fabelo

    • Travis is implementing a new offender diagnosis process for probationers relying on evidence-based assessment tools

  • Carey

    • Research shows what is effective for “proficient justice” but this requires some “culture” and organizational changes



Present assessment and intake process l.jpg
Present Assessment and Intake Process…..

….requires offenders to show up in different places

……makes them submit duplicative information…….



We are creating a central diagnosis process l.jpg

All felons referred to Central Diagnosis Unit

Central Diagnosis Unit

Expert staff

Quality control policies

Main Functions of Unit

Assess offenders, make diagnosis, identify supervision strategy and recommend conditions of supervision

Present Central Diagnosis Report to the Courts

Conditions of supervision set

PO develops specific supervision plan and accountability measures

PO administers tolerance level for violations based on overall policy for particular strategy

PO sets neighborhood/field visit strategy as appropriate for particular supervision strategy

We Are Creating a Central Diagnosis Process

….that provides “one stop” for offenders

…….uses one set of diagnosis forms

…….is backed by an assessment process that uses scientifically validated tools

….and is administered by expert officers subject to centralized quality control


Creating a diagnosis report a key change l.jpg

Future

Diagnosis Report

Identifying the offender along risk and behavioral characteristics related to supervision success using proven assessment tools and with short narratives generated from assessment instruments

Creating a Diagnosis Report a Key Change

Present

PSI

A “biography” collected using inconsistent interview protocols, with the “story telling” affected by different writing styles and utilizing no proven diagnosis tools to assess offenders



Two main assessment tools key to diagnosis l.jpg
Two Main Assessment Tools Key to Diagnosis

Risk Assessment Instrument

Identify factors related to re-arrests and revocations

Scientifically validated for Travis probation population

Supervision Case Strategies (SCS)

Interview/assessment protocol

Identify most effective supervision strategy for type of offender

Validated in research studies and endorsed by CJAD


Risk assessment l.jpg
Risk Assessment

High Risk Group

Medium Risk Group

Low Risk Group



Offenders in travis tracked for two years to validate risk assessment instrument l.jpg

June 06 Study

7,287 offenders placed on probation during this period*

Study Group

Jan. 2003 to April 2004

16 Months

Feb. 2004 – Jan. 2005

12 Months

Feb. 2005 – May 2006

15 Months

Tracked re-arrests and revocations for at least two years from probation placement

* First study of March 3, 2006 tracked 3,907 offenders placed Jan. 03 to Jan. 04 for at least two years up to Jan. 2006

Offenders in Travis Tracked for Two Years to Validate Risk Assessment Instrument


Instrument differentiate well for felons l.jpg
Instrument Differentiate Well for Felons

Felony Offenders: Percent Arrested/Incarcerated Two Years after Assessment by Risk Level

26% of felons were incarcerated after two years

43% of revocations were for administrative reasons

*1, 760 felons tracked


Differentiate also for misdemeanants l.jpg
Differentiate Also for Misdemeanants

Misdemeanor Offenders: Percent Arrested/Incarcerated Two Years after Assessment by Risk Level

12% of misdemeanants were incarcerated after two years

49% of those revoked were for administrative reasons

*5,527 misdemeanants tracked



Scs interview assessment protocol l.jpg

Behavioral

Observation

Vocational

Residential

Feelings

Interpersonal

relations

Objective

background

Family

Attitudes

Offense history

Plans &

Problems

School

Impressions

SCS Interview/Assessment Protocol

  • Semi structured Interview protocol

  • Funnel approach to systematically identify key behavioral factors

    • Rating of 70 items

  • Cross-validation and other integrity techniques for scoring

  • Classification of offenders in one of five groups


Protocol examines all relevant areas l.jpg
Protocol Examines All Relevant Areas

Objective Background

Legal

Medical

School

Family

Offense Pattern

Family Attitude

Attitudes about offense

Employment

Feelings

School Adjustment

Mental Health

Residential

Inter-Personal

Substance/Alcohol Abuse

Plans and Problems



Assessment leads to scs classification l.jpg
Assessment Leads to SCS Classification

SIS – Pro-social, stable lifestyle: offenders who need to get back on track through “Selective Intervention”

SIT – Pro-social but with skill deficit and/or substance abuse: offenders who need to get back on track through “Selective Intervention with Treatment” (like outpatient programs)

ES – Impulsive, lacks skills, easily led: offenders who need “Environmental Structure” (like job skill classes, role model type of interventions)

CC –Destructive thinking, low self esteem and emotional problems: offenders who need “Case Control” (like residential programs and cognitive programs)

LS –Criminal thinking, seeks power, thrills, money: offenders who need “Limit Setting” (like electronic monitoring, field contacts)




Minimize contacts for some max for others l.jpg

SIS – Pro-social, stable lifestyle

Supervision:

Intervene selectivelyDelegate planning to themUse rational problem solving techniquesOver-supervision counterproductiveMore tolerance for non-compliance

Minimal Intervention

LS –Criminal thinking, seeks power, thrills, money

Supervision:

SurveillanceAddress criminal thinkingDetailed precise case plansCarefully documentUse legal leverage/less tolerance for non-compliance

More Intrusive Intervention

Minimize Contacts for Some, Max for Others


Distribution of felony offenders l.jpg

227 felons placed on probation*

Study Group

Jan. 16, 2006 to February 28, 2006

Distribution of Felony Offenders

24%

27%

49%

*Report of 4/13/06


Distribution of misdemeanor offenders l.jpg
Distribution of Misdemeanor Offenders

468 misdemeanants placed on probation*

Study Group

Jan. 16, 2006 to February 28, 2006

56%

19%

25%

*Report of 4/13/06


Report to the court l.jpg
Report to the Court

Identifiers/Case Processing

Offense/Criminal History

Victim Information

Narrative of Assessment Highlights

Diagnosis Matrix


Important difference in culture l.jpg
Important Difference in “Culture”

Probation department will not make a“recommendation” for or against probation

Probation department will say this is a low, medium or high risk “yellow”, “blue” or “red”offender to be supervised under the strategiesand conditions set for that group



ad